I'm familiar with the adage (except it was "ass can't cash" around my neck of the woods) — in fact, it's one I've said myself — but I don't think
I've ever heard it applied to circumstances like this.

Maybe there's some regional/cultural thing I missing here but I grew up in the Deep South and I've lived in the Northeast for 20 years now and in
either place, I would say that the expectation that this assault would ever happen would be exceedingly low and yes, gender would be a factor in that
calculation (just like the context of a family restaurant).

It's simply so against social mores that it would take something truly extreme — a devastating and sustained assault on this guy's psyche — for
anyone to say, "Well that was really effed up but I don't know what she expected saying all that?" Even then, for him to finish his meal, pay
his check, leave and come running back in pushing aside kids in highchairs to punch her in the face? This guy sounds pretty unhinged. In other words,
an outlier when making that mental calculation.

Should she just operate under the assumption that anyone might be unhinged? What are the implications here? Avoid all confrontation at all costs? If
somebody strikes up an argument, demure and hope that person goes away? Get up and leave? Of course not. There is a certain amount of disagreement and
yes, arguing, that people expect to happen without an ensuing physical altercation.

I realize that you're agreeing that he's legally culpable and that what he did was wrong, etc but I think you're being too hasty when you assume that
she got herself into a situation that put her at a reasonable risk of being punched.

originally posted by: Counterintelligence
After all we have seen in this election it wouldn't surprise me if Soros and friends paid people to act as violent Ttump supporters and attack
women..it fulfills the narrative. Meanwhile we have a black gang beating the living s*** out of a white driver for supporting Trump..and those guys
certainly won't have been paid to do that. But which act of political violence do you think we will see on CNN etc?

So much disinformation and paid agitation has been PROVEN to come from the DMC that nothing would surprise me or practically anyone else..

Sure we have a few thousand student protestors..many of womb are paid..the rest are just naive or want to be part of a movement and they gave such a
damn about voting against Trump that around half didn't even bother voting.

HOLY DEFLECTION. I mean REALLY? I am not surprised people would go this way though. Trump supporter does it, it must be a soros thing.

Get out of here with that ridiculousness. Getting sucker punched by someone translates to "equal treatment" how, exactly? Your silly argument would
have a bit of merit if she had punched him first...no one could blame anyone, man or woman, for acting in self defense. But she did no such thing.

She simply exercised her right to free speech as a tax-paying American citizen, and got violently assaulted for it by a coward who had no reason to
hit her and was too much of a pussy to confront her directly, so he caught her off guard with a sucker punch. So the only conclusion that can be drawn
from your preposterous line of "reasoning" is that if a woman exercises her unalienable right to speak freely in a public establishment, then she has
no right to complain if someone hauls off and knocks the hell out of her. Because that's how gender equality works in America. Gtfo with that
ignorant, backward bullsh!t.

Equality being what it actually is, had this scumbag punched me in the face instead, he'd have left that restaurant in an ambulance...but I'm
scrappy like that. This woman was brutally assaulted, and she has every right to speak out about it. He belongs in jail, period. Anyone who
defends a person who violently assaults another human being like that with absolutely zero provocation is no better than he is either...ditto anyone
who starred your inane post, period.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
I agree that physical violence is totally uncalled for in a verbal engagement....from either side. However, I do have a few questions about the
incident that are not clear.

Q: Who was seated in the restaurant first, her party or theirs?

Q: Who started the interaction between the two groups?

Q: Were personal insults part of the discussion?

Q: Why was only one party moved to a new location and not both?

From the OP:

From Drost's understanding, two women, Clinton supporters, were sitting together eating dinner and discussing politics. A couple seated next to them,
Trump supporters, began arguing with the women, and the women requested to be moved, Drost said. The servers accommodated the women by moving the
Trump-supporter couple across the dining room.

It seems that the assailant interrupted a conversation they were eavesdropping on between the victim and her friend. I'd imagine that it became heated
and involved at least to some unacceptable level, as the two women requested a different table. That was the adult thing to do. However, since it was
the assailant and his companion who rudely butted in on the women's conversation, and this was witnessed by other patrons, they relocated them
instead...which was the right way to handle that situation. The women simply wanted to eat their meal in peace, so they were willing to get up and
move if needed, to diffuse the situation.

I'm puzzled by your last question though...why would both parties have to get up and move? That doesn't make sense to me. Only one party needed to
relocate in order to separate them. It would have been unnecessary to move both parties to another table, and likely not very easy if the restaurant
was crowded and a lot of tables were already occupied. In this city, they likely would have just shown the rude couple to the door, but this was in NY
so I can't speak to what is typical policy in that area.

There are really no excuses for hitting anyone, other than self defence of yourself or your loved ones, which does not appear to be the case here.
The guy should now face the consequences of his actions.

originally posted by: Counterintelligence
After all we have seen in this election it wouldn't surprise me if Soros and friends paid people to act as violent Ttump supporters and attack
women..it fulfills the narrative. Meanwhile we have a black gang beating the living s*** out of a white driver for supporting Trump..and those guys
certainly won't have been paid to do that. But which act of political violence do you think we will see on CNN etc?

So much disinformation and paid agitation has been PROVEN to come from the DMC that nothing would surprise me or practically anyone else..

Sure we have a few thousand student protestors..many of womb are paid..the rest are just naive or want to be part of a movement and they gave such a
damn about voting against Trump that around half didn't even bother voting.

HOLY DEFLECTION. I mean REALLY? I am not surprised people would go this way though. Trump supporter does it, it must be a soros thing.

Okay the man that hit this woman is either a very big pussy that should never come out in the public again or he was paid a lot of money or at least
offered a lot of money to hit that woman.

No man with any ethical code within himself sucker punches anybody.... especially a woman. I have read nothing except for the opening post so I
don't know if any further information has come out or not but I did gather enough information from the original post to say that much.

originally posted by: denybedoomed
Holy Christ am I actually seeing people condone the assault of a woman over words on this site?! Wtf happened to ats . . .

I think the main thing that happened with ATS was 2012, it brought in a tooooon of these types. I really miss the old ATS too, and the
cool/weird/scary/strange instead of all of the nonstop political and social issue crap.

As far as that goes...I have no idea how a woman getting punched in a restaurant over a political argument has ANY relevance to the original theme of
this site...

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.